Wear Behavior and Surface Quality of Dental Bioactive Ions-Releasing Resins Under Simulated Chewing Conditions

García, Isadora Martini; Balhaddad, Abdulrahman A.; Aljuboori, Noorhan; Ibrahim, Maria Salem; Mokeem, Lamia; Ogubunka, Akudo; Collares, Fabrício Mezzomo; Melo, Mary Anne Sampaio de

doi:10.3389/froh.2021.628026

Cited by 14 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, water storage did not significantly affect the K IC , therefore this was the most stable material studied. The fact that the Fuji II LC is quite resistant to water-induced deterioration has been reported in previous studies about RMGIC; this property has been ascribed to the formation of a more robust polysalt matrix after water storage [32,33].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 57%

Mechanical Stability of Self-Adhesive/Ion-Releasing Resin Composites

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of water storage on the surface microhardness (VHN) and fracture toughness (K1C) of two self-adhesive restorative materials compared to traditional resin composite and resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) restorative materials. Methods: Two self-adhesive materials (Activa and Vertise Flow), a nonflowable composite (Filtek Z250), and an RMGIC (Fuji II) were evaluated. Hardness measurements (n = 12) were recorded at three time intervals: (i) one-hour post-irradiation; (ii) after one day of storage in water at 37 °C; and (iii) after 90 days of storage in water at 37 °C. Fracture toughness (K1C) measurements (n = 12) were conducted after one day of storage in water at 37 °C and 90 days of storage in water at 37 °C. ANOVA and Tukey post hoc tests were used for statistical analysis. Results: Baseline VHN data were 38.2–58.3, decreasing significantly to 28.8–55.6 following 90 days of water storage. The Filtek Z250 had the highest VHN before and after storage, while the Activa had the lowest. KIC values varied between 0.98–1.32 MPa·m0.5. The highest value was for the Filtek Z250 while the Fuji II showed the lowest value (after both 1 and 90 days of storage in water). However, KIC values decreased significantly after storage, except for the Fuji II. Conclusion: Self-adhesive/ion-releasing resin composites were negatively affected by water storage. Material reinforcements are possible future areas to explore.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 57%

Mechanical Stability of Self-Adhesive/Ion-Releasing Resin Composites

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies have shown that microhardness values of a composite can be affected by several factors such as organic and inorganic composition, filler content and the distribution on the surface, and degree of C=C conversion in methacrylate groups and cross-linking density. 45,46 In this study, a linear correlation (R 2 = 0.86) can be observed between the filler content (wt.%) and the microhardness (Fig. 6).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 66%

Comparative analysis of self‐cure and dual cure‐dental composites on their physico‐mechanical behaviour

Thadathil Varghese,

Raju,

Farrar

et al. 2023

Australian Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundClinical practitioners may have become familiar with the rapid transformation of dental composites. However, they may not scientifically understand the factors influencing the mechanical and physical properties. Scientific knowledge of filler‐resin interaction can significantly improve clinical understanding of resin composites. Several independent studies have examined the mechanical and physico‐mechanical properties of dental resin composites; however, no comprehensive study has examined the influence of fillers and resin materials on the physico‐mechanical properties of both self‐cure and dual‐cure composites.MethodsThis study performed investigations on the physico‐mechanical behaviour of four commercially available dual‐cure dental composites (Bioactive, Fill Up!, Surefil One, Cention N) and two commercially available self‐cure dental composites (Stela Capsule and Stela Automix). Test specimens for flexural and compressive strength, microhardness, fracture toughness, and hydrolytic behaviour were prepared and tested as per respective standards. The data sets were statistically analysed using one‐way ANOVA and Tukey's post‐hoc comparison.ResultsThere was a substantial variation in flexural strength and modulus values in this study, ranging from 32.0 to 113.4 MPa and 2.36 to 12.07 GPa, respectively. Similarly, there were significant differences in compressive strength between the materials in this study, ranging from 119.3 to 223.5 MPa. The highest fracture toughness value was found to be 1.41 MPa.m0.5, while the lowest value was 0.43 MPa.m0.5. Variations in surface microhardness were significant (24.11–68.0 N/mm2), which correlated with the filler content. Water sorption and solubility demonstrated high variations among materials, with Surefil One exceeding ISO 4049 thresholds significantly.ConclusionsA linear correlation can be established between surface microhardness (HV) and flexural and compressive moduli, as well as filler content (wt.%). However, both flexural and compressive strengths are impacted by the resin's constituent monomers and the resin‐filler matrix's cross‐linking capability. Additionally, factors such as filler size, shape, and the cross‐linking ability of the resin‐filler matrix play a crucial role in fracture toughness and the propagation of cracks within the restoration. Also, resin monomers and filler particle size affect the hydrolytic degradation characteristics of composites, which can also affect their mechanical properties. © 2023 Australian Dental Association.

show abstract

“…This would have facilitated their uptake by the sealant to recharge it with ions. This in turn would have reflected on incorporating minerals onto the enamel surface [ 30 ]. It was markedly noticed that percentage decrease of P ions from demineralization to remineralization was significantly lower with fluoride sealant than with bioactive sealant.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of a bioactive pit and fissure sealant on demineralized human enamel: in vitro study

Salma

AbdElfatah

2022

BMC Oral Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Incorporation of bioactive agent into pit and fissure sealant would halt demineralization and promote further remineralization. The aim was to assess the effect of bioactive and fluoride fissure sealants on calcium and phosphate content and surface topography of artificially demineralized enamel in young permanent teeth. Methods 30 sound extracted premolars free from cracks or any developmental anomalies were used. They were divided into group I bioactive fissure sealant, group II fluoride fissure sealant and group III no material applied. Each tooth was divided into halves in a buccolingual direction and evaluated by energy dispersive X-ray spectrometer (EDX) at baseline, demineralization and after applying the material. Another set of 7 sound extracted premolars was evaluated by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) at the same phases. Results EDX showed that regaining calcium to demineralized enamel was significantly higher with bioactive sealant than either fluoride or the control group. SEM revealed minerals deposits with formation of distinct white zone at tooth/sealant interface for both pit and fissure sealant groups. Whereas no white zone formation was detected in control group. Conclusions Incorporating bioactive material into pit and fissure sealant through microcapsules provided better results than incorporating fluoride by enhancing the biological process of remineralization. Clinical relevance: The more use of bioactive pit and fissure sealant would maintain the occlusal surfaces as sound structures and decrease the need for operative procedures to restore teeth cavitation.

show abstract

Wear Behavior and Surface Quality of Dental Bioactive Ions-Releasing Resins Under Simulated Chewing Conditions

Cited by 14 publications

References 37 publications

Mechanical Stability of Self-Adhesive/Ion-Releasing Resin Composites

Mechanical Stability of Self-Adhesive/Ion-Releasing Resin Composites

Comparative analysis of self‐cure and dual cure‐dental composites on their physico‐mechanical behaviour

Effect of a bioactive pit and fissure sealant on demineralized human enamel: in vitro study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About